Ford is rewriting the rules of the company and industry with the introduction of its all-new advanced 6.7-liter Power Stroke V-8 diesel engine for the 2011 F-Series Super Duty pickups.

“The 6.7-liter diesel puts the motor back in Ford Motor Company,” said Adam Gryglak, the engine’s lead engineer. “This is the most advanced Power Stroke yet with the cleanest emissions,” lower noise, vibration and harshness “and substantially improved power and fuel economy.”

Codenamed “Scorpion,” the 6.7-liter PSD is Ford’s first-ever designed-in-house pickup truck diesel engine since the first oil burner (International’s 6.9-liter V-8) was offered under the hood of a Ford pickup in 1982.

“This was a global effort within Ford to create this engine,” Gryglak said. “We applied many of the lessons learned from Ford’s European operations.”

Ford’s road to the Scorpion has been long and winding. The 6.7-liter PSD is the third all-new heavy duty diesel engine in 7 years and the fourth since production of the 7.3-liter Power Stroke ended in 2002.

Its creation can be traced back to the 6.0-liter Power Stroke that Ford introduced for its 2003 Super Duty pickups. Ford and Navistar (International’s parent company) went to battle in court over warranty problems and cost issues related to that engine, which ultimately led to both companies ending their 30-year diesel manufacturing relationship in January. Ford kept the rights to the well-known Power Stroke name that has been associated with Ford diesels since 1994.

No more Navistar. The 6.7-liter Power Stroke V-8 is Ford's first diesel motor for its F-Series pickups to be developed entirely in-house after three decades partnering with the contract engine manufacturer. It will be built at Ford's plant in Mexico.

Ford introduced the 6.4-liter Power Stroke for its 2008 Super Duty pickups in order to meet tough emissions laws that required an immediate 90-percent reduction in soot, a natural byproduct of diesel combustion; General Motors and Chrysler did the same.

Clean-air regulations will be ratcheted up again on January 1, 2010. Diesel-powered pickups built after that date will have to have engines that reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by 90 percent from today’s standards and by 96 percent from 1994 standards.

NOx is a major air pollutant that contributes to smog, asthma, and respiratory and heart diseases. It's caused by diesel’s high combustion temperatures, which results from the high frictional heat created by compressing air in the cylinders to the point where it can ignite diesel fuel without using a spark.

But where GM and its engine development partner Isuzu have been able to reuse the basic architecture of the 6.6-liter LML Duramax V-8 diesel engine introduced in 2001, and Dodge is carrying over the 6.7-liter Cummins I6 that’s been in service since 2007, the Ford 6.7-liter V-8 is an almost total clean sheet redesign that uses many unconventional solutions to meet the needs of its drivers and the EPA.

Reverse Flow Design

The Scorpion’s architecture shares several key traits with GM's indefinitely postponed 4.5-liter Duramax V-8 diesel engine. Most notably, the intake and exhaust flow through the cylinder heads is reversed when compared to a conventional diesel engine, with the exhaust exiting directly into the engine’s turbo that sits in the engine's valley, mounted between V-style cylinder banks.

“When we looked at the at the design imperatives of the program we were looking to ensure that we delivered improved performance, fuel economy, NVH and heat management with the aftertreatment system,” Gryglak said. “The reverse flow and inboard exhaust configuration helps us achieve all of those objectives. It’s a smarter design.”

New aluminum cylinder heads replace cast iron to save weight. They feature dual water jackets for cooling and a six-bolt attachment pattern for extra strength. Note the asymmetrical sizes and layouts of the intake (larger) and exhaust (smaller) ports.

“Total exhaust volume and surface area of this configuration is about half that of the previous engine,” Gryglak said. “At the same time, we’ve been able to significantly improve the throttle feel of the truck.”

Single Sequential Turbo

Ford also reengineered the variable geometry turbo from the ground up with help from Honeywell’s Garrett Turbo Division (the same turbo supplier for the Duramax). As modern diesel mills like the 6.7-liter have become more powerful from generation to generation, emissions limits have gotten much tighter, and it’s become progressively difficult to match the turbo’s dual jobs of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) with acceptable levels of responsiveness.

Instead
of using two separate sequential turbochargers like the current
6.4-liter PSD, the new Single Sequential Turbocharger places two
compressors back-to-back (right side of picture in blue, representing
cool intake fed air) to create a twin turbo setup in a single package.
The VGT turbo still uses a variable vane setup around the turbine (left
side of picture in red, representing hot exhaust) that continually
change the velocity of the exhaust gas and wheel speed.

EGR recirculates some of the engine's exhaust back into the engine at a lower temperature. The cooled gases have a higher heat capacity and contain less oxygen than air, lowering combustion temperatures and reducing the formation of NOx.

Multi-turbo systems, like the previous Borg Warner two-turbo sequential setup that the 6.4-liter PSD used, can overcome these issues but they also face problems in packaging and heat that wouldn’t work with the Scorpion’s new architecture.

“The turbo we’re using for the 6.7-liter engine is called a ‘Single Sequential Turbo,’” Gryglak said. “It’s a triple-wheel design with a single turbine and two compressors placed back-to-back. What we’ve done is take a twin-turbo configuration and package it into a single unit that gives us seamless transitions [as its adds boost throughout the RPM range and power band]. It also allows us to drive EGR at very low airflow rates to meet the new NOx regulations but also allows us to build the boost we need to overcome the pressure from the EGR.”

The Siamese compressor wheels are near-mirror images of each other. They have the same diameter and are optimized to reduce pressure differences that could cause noise or airflow issues. By packaging them as two smaller turbos, mass is also kept closer to the shaft which helps with balance and durability. The turbo is quicker to boost and better able to deliver horsepower and torque, especially at the low end where it’s needed most the help get heavy loads moving quickly.

External picture of the Power Stroke's new SST turbocharger.

The SST turbo continues to use variable vanes that surround the turbine wheel to dynamically adjust turbo speed using exhaust gases. During engine operation at low speeds and load, the vanes are closed to accelerate exhaust gases across the turbine wheel to help increase turbo wheel speed quickly. At high speeds the vanes are opened to help prevent the turbo overspeed. It's also been enhanced to introduce exhaust braking into the platform.

“You’ll get the feeling [when you’re driving in] tow/haul mode but it won’t explicitly be called exhaust braking. It’s built into the system,” Gryglak said.

The turbo also uses a brand new ball-bearing cartridge that surrounds the turbo shaft to help provide a double-digit increase in spool-up times.

Though some turbos are mounted to the engine off the turbine side – a solution that can cause balance issues requiring extra structural reinforcement and noises like whistles and whines – Ford balances the SST by mounting it at the turbo’s center using a 4-bolt pedestal housing. The compressor stage is bracketed back to the pedestal so it has an extremely stiff structure in front. Separate oil and water feeds flow through the pedestal to lubricate and cool the turbocharger and eliminate as many external connections as possible. The front of the pedestal houses the turbo’s oil filter.

The 6.7-liter SST provides up to around 30 psi boost compared to approximately 40 psi from the 6.4-liter dual-sequential unit and operates at up to 130,000 rpms.

New 'single plane' rocker arms are individually attached to each of the 4 valves per cylinder (2 intake, 2 exhaust) instead of using a bridge to open or close the valves in tandem.

Two Cooling Systems

The Scorpion has two separate cooling systems, each with its own radiator and water pump.

The primary cooling loop cools the engine and operates at about 194 degrees. A secondary 122-degree loop controls the temperatures of the EGR, fuel and transmission coolers and a brand new air-to-water charge air cooler that replaces the previous air-to-air intercooler. The CAC sits between the turbo compressor outlet and the intake manifold to cool the air heated by passing through the twin turbos.

“Overall, the cooling pack is significant smaller” than the 6.4, said Ed Waszczenko, lead durability engineer for the Scorpion. Waszczenko was responsible for testing every component of the Power Stroke by pushing them to their breaking point to ensure durability. “The engine is more efficient. We need less cooling. A lot of the heat management of the engine has helped us reduce the cooling requirements.”

EGR and SCR

All of the engine’s EGR comes off only the right cylinder bank. Ford did extensive research that showed EGR could be pulled from a single bank instead of both sides of the engine to reduce the plumbing required. It also eliminates airflow balance issues that can occur when pulling EGR gases from two cylinder banks.

The 6.7-liter EGR system uses two EGR coolers, like the 6.4-liter setup, but it introduces a “hot-side valve” at the front of the first cooler that controls the volume of air let into the system instead of using a conventional “cool-side valve” behind the second cooler.

EGR is only pulled from a single engine. It's the first step in scrubbing NOx emissions to meet 2010 EPA rules. The second step is the application of Diesel Exhaust Fluid (aka urea) in the exhaust stream, which will require periodic refills.

Ford says the move to a hot-side valve was a lesson learned from its diesel experience in Europe, where other hot-side systems have been engineered to avoid the valve getting jammed from particulates.

“Cold-side applications have extensive warranty issues for valves stuck open due to soot deposits,” Waszczenko said. “The challenge for us is to get [the hot-side valve] enough cooling so the valve is durable for 250,000 miles. There’s an iron valve and aluminum valve, both water-cooled. They expand differently based on their construction. The F-550 and up will use the iron valve. Lower engines will use the aluminum valve.”

Three other key design EGR features include:

A floating core design, instead of clamshell, that allows the EGR coolers to independently move within their housings as they thermally expand and shrink.

An EGR bypass valve directs exhaust gases straight into the induction system when the engine is cold during startup to get EGR working as soon as possible to lower NOX levels.

And a repurposed throttle body that’s used like an EGR valve to drive the correct amount of EGR that the system requires at the right pressure.

Waszczenko says all the changes have made the EGR system more durable. “We have not failed a single EGR cooler during testing,” he said.

SCR uses diesel exhaust fluid, a urea-based solution (32.5 percent industrial urea and 67.5 percent deionized water), that’s injected as a fine mist into the engine’s hot exhaust gases. The heat turns the urea into ammonia that – when combined with a special catalytic converter – breaks the NOx down into nitrogen gas and water vapor. It's similar to the approach used by Chrysler for its 2010 Dodge Ram 3500/4500/5500 cab chassis trucks.

Diesel exhaust fluid refill intervals will vary depending on duty cycle. Some customers will only have to refill during routing maintenance, such as when the oil is changed, while others will have to top off the tank sooner.

“We think we’ve found the right balance between what the engine EGR can deliver and what the DEF system can do,” said Chris Oberski, emissions engineer for the 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel engine.

Airflow

Airflow cutaway showing the throttle body (which is used primarily to assist with the exhaust aftertreatment) and intake manifold that's made from composite material instead of aluminum.

Air comes into the engine through the airbox and is directed passively through upper and lower chambers into the compressor portion of the turbo. At the same time, hot combusted gases from the engine are cooled using EGR. Both the cold compressed air and hot EGR are mixed together in the EGR throttle body and then directed into special chambers on either side of the intake manifold. The manifold uses tuned resonators to cancel out any pressure waves that are created within the intake system that could be heard as transient airflow noise, such as a drone or moaning sound.

The intake manifold is made from a composite material. Gryglak said that using aluminum would have created a heat sink that would have robbed power from the motor.

Special flow-mapped rocker covers that seal the valvetrain and provide structural rigidity also have feed chambers that direct air to the intake valves and then into the cylinders for combustion.

Combustion Components and Capability

Every moving part of the Scorpion’s cam-in-block design is new, from the crank to the pushrod valvetrain.

“It takes a fundamentally different combustion system to achieve lower feedback noise levels from the engine and maintain, or in our case, reduce emissions,” Gryglak said. “We’re also promising significantly improved fuel economy.”

The forged connecting rods are attached to the steel crankshaft using a 45-degree slant opening in the rod, instead of 90 degrees, for easier assembly. New cast pistons are gallery-cooled to control temperatures, with one entry and one exit for oil to flow through in the bottom of the piston. When the piston descends during the combustion cycle, a cooling jet of oil is fired into the entry. Special oil drillings add extra lubrication to the joint where the rod and piston are joined.

The pistons (top) have a unique bowl shape design that helps reduce noise and emissions during combustion. The connecting rods (middle) are attached to the crank using a 45-degree opening. 3rd generation piezo electric fuel injectors (bottom) have 8 holes and can squirt fuel up to 5 times per stroke.

Ford officials said they spent close to two years to find the optimal balance between in-cylinder noise and emissions during combustion.

The top of the cast-aluminum piston is very unique. Its bowl-like shape plays a key role by helping control the chaotic swirl of the fuel-air charge during combustion. Ford and piston supplier Federal Mogul cycled through dozens of CAD iterations and twelve physical designs to create just the right concavity for the piston top, according to Oberski.

The Bosch common-rail fuel system operates at up to 30,000 psi to send fuel to the engine’s 8 piezo injectors -- one per cylinder. Each injector nozzle has 8 holes and can deliver up to 5 injections per combustion cycle. Two pilot injections control noise levels, and a main injection is used for the power-generating combustion event. Two variable post injections are used to produce extra torque and for heating up emissions catalysts that scrub NOx and eliminate soot downstream from the engine. While cruising, only 3 or 4 injections will be needed.

“We’re using the third-generation of this technology,” Gryglak said. “It’s key to meeting our fuel economy and emissions objectives. It allows us to better atomize the fuel to mix it with the incoming air for improved combustion efficiency.”

The compression ratio drops a bit, to 16.2 from 16.7.

Special acoustic covers sit over the injectors on each cylinder bank to quiet impulsive noises from the fuel system as well as to lower overall NVH from the engine.

The high pressure common rail fuel system operates at up to 30,000 psi

The asymmetrical layout of the intake and exhaust valves is the last approach needed to manage noise and emissions. It’s a four-valve setup, like the 6.4-liter engine, where the two intake ports are larger than the two exhaust ports.

The overhead valvetrain also uses a new rocker-arm configuration to open and close the two intake and two exhaust valves. It’s designed to improve the engine’s wear characteristics. Four pushrods per cylinder (two per hydraulic lifter) each have a single-plane rocker arm that’s individually connected to one of the four valves instead of using a conventional bridged valvetrain setup that runs multiple valves in tandem. It’s the first time Ford has created such a solution.

“What you’ll notice in the shape of the [engine] block is the structure that’s been added,” Gryglak said. “It has very thin wall sections. We’ve added structure to where it’s needed, but still saved overall weight. From a weight to displacement ratio, this will be the lightest block in the segment. The overall engine platform is about 160 pounds lighter than 6.4-liter diesel.”

The engine uses a two-piece oil pan to help store its 13 quart capacity. The bottom piece is composite to help quiet the engine.

The engine block is the first use of compacted graphite iron instead of conventional gray iron that saves weight while gaining strength. Note the prominent ribbed structures where additional reinforcement has been added.

After all the radical changes to the engine, the overall packaging is the same as the last engine. The 2011 Super Duty won’t require any frame modifications.

We witnessed the engines being tested in an acoustic dyno chamber and can report back that noise levels are noticeably lower on the 6.7-liter engine than the 6.4-liter PSD.

Transmission

Ford is quiet for now about the Scorpion’s transmission, though we expect the Super Duty's new gearbox will be the new 6R140 heavy-duty six-speed automatic with power takeoff capability.

Ford officially says the standard manual transmission is gone as of the 2011 model year. The take rate was too low to justify continuing production of the ZF-source 6-speed handshaker. The rear cover of the new engine follows an SAE 12 bolt standard that allows Ford to mate almost any HD automatic transmission to the back of the mill.

“We’ve protected the customer if they want to use B20,” said Gryglak “Biodiesel blends can sometimes vary in quality, so on our low-pressure feed lines into the high-pressure fuel pump there’s a pressure switch. If there’s a bad batch of fuel, sensors will immediately notify the customer they have an issue [through] the trip computer.”

Ford recommends that customers running biodiesel in the 6.7-liter engine not to let the fuel sit for longer than a month. Otherwise, things can start to grow.

Testing the Engine

Scorpion engine in a dyno test cell.

Ford says it has put the 6.7-liter engine through a vigorous testing scheme to identify any potential weaknesses or quality concerns before the first units wind up in the hands of customers.

A 250,000 mile durability test looks for structural fatigue points. It simulates the driving habits of 95th percentile Super Duty customers who pull the heaviest loads. The engines are placed in a dyno cell where they spend nearly 6 hours running continuously at peak torque and then 3.5 hours at peak grade power to prove out connecting rod and rotating mass strength. The cycle repeats for 1,200 hours, or 50 days of running.

A thermal fatigue test is used to prove out the engine assembly process by stressing the head gasket, joints, radiator connections and other seals. For this test cycle, the engine is idled and then throttled up to peak power for about 14 minutes. That’s enough time for the engine to get red hot. It’s then shut off and 16-degrees below zero coolant is pumped in and allowed to soak for a few moments before the engine is fired back up to rated power. The shock loop is 150 hours long, or 75 cycles.

A structural test is run to make sure the engine’s build tolerances and parts acceptance criteria are set properly, so there are no surprises during production. Engines are built using actual parts with purposely incorporated defects that simulate the worst quality issues Ford has seen in production, such as low head bolt torque or inclusions in the piston casting bowl. It’s a new test that the Scorpion team determined was necessary if the engine was going to be built in-house.

Finally, there’s a real-world wear test that, like the durability test, simulates the operating conditions and applications of Ford’s 95th percentile customer. Fully assembled Super Duty engineering test mules are run over 250,000 miles of the most grueling roads in the U.S. with the toughest grades in temperatures that vary from -40 to 130 degrees. It’s the equivalent of 10 years of services in six months. Two-hundred test points are measured at peak rated power and torque over every speed range to make sure the engine’s entire real world operating spectrum is tested.

At the end of each of these tests, the engines are broken down and the team examines every component, looking for problem areas. When problems are found, they’re fixed and then the test cycles start over again.

Putting Their Money Where Their Mouths Are

Ford won’t say how much money it invested in the 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel, but we think it may be the most expensive single engine program in the company’s history. Perhaps we’ll see more Scorpion derivatives to spread the investment among a larger group of vehicles.

Ford also isn’t talking about the prices when the engines go on sale in the 2011 Super Duty next year. We think it will run more than the current engine. But Ford does repeat over and over like a mantra: the 6.7-liter PSD will be the most powerful, most fuel-efficient and the most-refined Power Stroke diesel engine yet. And the team that created it says it will be around a long time.

Am I sensing a V6 Scorpion diesel from the last paragraph , perhaps like GM did with the 350 V8 and the 4.3 liter V6 , pretty sweet engine none the less I hope some hopelessly bad angry diesel hating test driver drove the hell out of it to make sure everything is durable .

Posted by: Taylor | Aug 30, 2009 11:17:51 PM

Great write-up, you were not pulling our legs over the info you had....

Thanks!

The connecting rods don't look as beefy as they should...

Posted by: Pourinthecoal | Aug 30, 2009 11:20:48 PM

A true beast that will last many years.

Posted by: Sint | Aug 30, 2009 11:21:43 PM

3 problems with it.

1)Aluminum Heads. Should not be on a diesel

2)Needs Urea System. GM and Ford should have a system that doesnt need it, like the Cummins uses.

3)V8. V8s have 40% more moving parts then I6s. 40% more moving parts means 40% more things that can go wrong.

Other then that it is bound to be better then the turd they have been using since getting rid of the 7.3.

Posted by: Hmmm? | Aug 30, 2009 11:26:18 PM

# post by Hmmm?

"Aluminum Heads. Should not be on a diesel"

In Europe it´s common with alu-heads on high performing diesels with CGI in the block. Even if the 6-litre Audi V-12 has only 738 lb-ft of torque it´s enough to shred all four tires with ease. 500 hp the R8 V12 TDI storms to 62mph in 4.2 seconds and maxes out at 186mph, it also manages to get 23 MPG. With alu-head and CGI-block.

There´s a new sheriff in town,,,a 6,7 litre Scorpion

Posted by: Sint | Aug 30, 2009 11:47:55 PM

4th...it's made in Mexico.

Posted by: monsta | Aug 31, 2009 12:01:33 AM

It will be interesting to see the power this thing makes.

Posted by: JOhn | Aug 31, 2009 1:00:42 AM

5th, its a Ford.

Posted by: Zedd | Aug 31, 2009 1:01:58 AM

Things I like:

Increased displacement to 6.7L (makes it more competitive with 6.6L Duramax and 6.7L Cummins)

Pushrod design and intake-valley-mounted turbos for compactness. No need to remove the cab for most things anymore? Much better!

6 bolts per cylinder, much better than the 4 bolts used previously (think 6.0L PS).

Things I don't like:

-EGR, DEF, and DPF. I know they're pretty much required to meet future emissions, but I wish they could have found a way to at least get rid of one of them.

-250,000 mile durability testing. This is only average for a diesel. The Cummins 6.7L was designed to last 350,000 miles. Other heavier class diesel engines are rated for 1,000,000 miles before an overhaul. The benchmark for this engine should have been somewhere between 300,000 and 500,000 miles.

-The lack of a MANUAL TRANSMISSION! I simply will not buy a 1 ton or greater chassis cab in automatic. Since Dodge still offers a stick it looks like I'll be going with them in the future. I do buy automatic vans though, so hopefully I'll get to try this engine in the Econoline series.

As far as the engine goes, so far I'm liking it. It sounds as if they've really started from a clean slate and built on the technology exhibited in other proven diesels. This makes me think they've worked hard to make sure this engine is done right the first time.

Posted by: Paul | Aug 31, 2009 2:31:45 AM

They keep saying they are testing to "95th percentile of drivers". Maybe they felt the 250,000 mile durability test met that requirement.

Another article I've seen rumored 390 hp, 800 lb-ft torque with a 25% fuel mileage improvement over the 6.4L.

Posted by: Greg | Aug 31, 2009 4:50:22 AM

Awesome engine...wonder if it will be available in a naturally aspirated (non-turbo) version sometime down the road.

Posted by: Scott | Aug 31, 2009 6:44:31 AM

Mike,
I have a stupid question for you or others on here. If a truck is using the urea injection does the truck require a a DPF? If a truck is not required to have a DPF, then will the truck have a regen mode where it shoots excess fuel in to burn the soot out of the exhaust? If the truck does not go through a regen mode, ultimately, the truck should get better fuel mileage. If any of my assumptions are correct, then the Ford and GM should get better fuel economy. Also, if they do not have to have a DPF this will work better for trucks that are used on the farm or for brush rig fire trucks because the high temperature DPf will not be dragging on the grass or stubble in fields.

Thanks,
Brian

Posted by: Brian | Aug 31, 2009 9:07:24 AM

@Brian: That's *not* a "stupid" question at all considering how complex the emissions systems have become.

Yes, the 6.7-L still requires a diesel particulate filter to trap soot/particulates from the exhaust stream. And it still needs to meter fuel into the exhaust stream to heat the DPF to over 1000-degrees to clean it out like a self-cleaning oven.

Comment to Paul's desire to test it in the Econoline series. Sadly Ford will no longer be offering diesel engines in the Econoline series for the immediate and most likely long term future. The current emissions compliant 6.4L engine that is in the F-series does not fit in the E-series which is why they have stayed with the 6.0L in that line. They have already announce this past spring that the new engine will also not fit and they are discontinuing the use of diesels in that line after this year. The option will now only be the Triton gas engine.

Posted by: rumrunner | Aug 31, 2009 10:01:15 AM

glad to see they've kept the powerstroke name, but all that emissions crap is making me not want one, and why does it have to be so quiet, i love loud diesels

Posted by: jacob | Aug 31, 2009 10:07:40 AM

There isn't anything sequential about the turbocharger.
It is a good design, go axially instead of radially.

More parts=[can] equal less specific stress per part, therefore less chance of failure.

Fords rule, sound amazing fords are the kings, either way for had probs with the 6.0 and minor ones with the 6.4 this one will have none, it will just work more and more, fords diesels have always been the best seller either way, and there are lots of high mileage 6.0's out there. drive it like a ford.

Posted by: Nick | Aug 31, 2009 8:42:54 PM

If this new engine uses urea, which has a fairly high freeze point, will it use a heated tank ?, and if so what will be used to heat it..I think i'll stick to my 7.3l

Posted by: rusty | Aug 31, 2009 9:03:06 PM

Impressive, but I wonder about cost and complexity. I think the day of the diesel light truck may be drawing to a close. When will we see a report on the 6.2L 'Boss' gas V-8?

Posted by: Big Bob | Sep 1, 2009 4:11:48 AM

"If this new engine uses urea, which has a fairly high freeze point, will it use a heated tank ?, and if so what will be used to heat it..I think i'll stick to my 7.3l"

The Urea tank uses coolant to heat the fluid. Urea is not injected for 30min after the engine has been running. Plenty time to heat it up.

Posted by: Home Skillet | Sep 1, 2009 11:45:08 AM

HM in the last 8 or 9 years Ford has used 4 different Diesels in their trucks and their last 2 engines really havn't been anything special.... It's no slam dunk that this engine is going to be a "beast" because i heard the same thing about the 6.0 and the 6.4, If i had to go with a diesel i would take the Duramax. As of right now, its the most proven diesel engine on the market. And before anyone says the 6.7 is better is just a Dodge fan-boy, don't get this engine confused with the 5.9, its not nearly as reliable and has had its fair share of problems... This may be a great engine from Ford but i would let things play out a little bit first before we say this thing is the king.

Posted by: nick | Sep 1, 2009 12:38:22 PM

at -20 degrees in minnasota the urea is going to freeze in a coouple of hours without it running

Posted by: andy | Sep 1, 2009 8:09:38 PM

I have a 2002 7.3 Its never let me down. Its riged with a welding bed and a 1500lb welder. I think its a keeper!!!

Posted by: Teddy | Sep 1, 2009 9:51:37 PM

nick your funny. Anybody who doent know that the 6.7 is the 5.9 just upped in displacement is funny. 07 had problems with the DPF, but all of the eairly 07s, that includes the powerstroke and duramax, had that problem. By 08 Cummins had those problems ironed out, making the 6.7 just as reliable as the 5.9.

The Cummins IS the BEST diesel on the market.

As for the new powerstroke, I'm going to wait and see if it is any better then the old 6.0 and 6.4 powerjokes.

Posted by: hmmm? | Sep 1, 2009 10:25:44 PM

Another Ford engine???? How about fixing the ones customers already have and perfecting the existing line of engines? I guess Ford is looking to make the used truck market go extinct. Sorry ford, if you keep going with these overblown V8's over an I6 like EVERYONE wants you will never corner the Truck market again.

Posted by: weeber | Sep 2, 2009 7:44:21 AM

Weeber, why would Ford fix something they didn't even make? Have you got a solution as to how they could possibly do that? At least Ford is doing something about it by making it themselves. And if it is a problem like the 6.0, they can only blame themselves. And not EVERYONE wants an I-6.

Posted by: Alex | Sep 2, 2009 11:04:19 AM

let me test drive one and see how long it last. my o3 last 5 months // 04 only lasted 1yr. 10 months // knock wood my 05 as lasted 4 yrs. but as had a few issues still schemees front end and air pressure does not matter/ ac/ electrical issues such as lights not working (dim)// horn system replaced twice due too going off on its on and other elec. issues so make sure the whole truck works not just the motor

Posted by: kopper | Sep 3, 2009 8:20:11 AM

Blah Blah Blah it's all hype. Any new engine or platform has teething problems, what makes you think this is any different? Is Ford going to train their mechanics to work on this engine BEFORE it is released, or will it be the usual and the poor suckers that buy it first get to be the test rats? I would expect long downtimes and multiple visits at first until the techs are up to speed on this engines quirks.

Posted by: jimjimmerson | Sep 3, 2009 10:39:24 PM

Gal dam thats a lot of emissions crap! yall playin the name game, but how many of you have ever run a 6.9L international harvester IDI diesel with a 4 speed? i run one every day for the last 948K miles of its life since 1984. oh, and i bet mine will start up faster then any of yers no matter what the temperature is and i can change my oil, dump it in the fuel tank and keep on truckin.

Posted by: International harvester | Sep 6, 2009 7:57:27 PM

The new 6.7 is a very astute engine design. If the owner experience is positive (reliability and fuel economy) it will become a profit maker for Ford. Aluminum cylinder heads can be very reliable, given proper design. There is a recent SAE paper available on diesel head design. The iron block and six bolt head connection provide a reasonable structural basis for moving to an aluminum head.

Posted by: Marvin McConoughey | Sep 7, 2009 8:57:30 AM

when will they ever learn. building an engine as important as this one will have no chance being built in mexico. man up and build this engine in michigan, indiana ohio, or kentucky. the junk thats produced in mexico isnt fit for a fiesta and not just a super product such as this important mill. also dont let isuzu run the project they just like to fill up their pockets with cash and insist on japanese suppliers with overpriced products or services. ford you can do it on your own and do it right.

Posted by: dana | Sep 8, 2009 12:48:43 AM

very dissapointed that there will be no manual
you lose too much power and fuel economy going thru an auto I know I have one auto two manuals

Posted by: leaving ford | Sep 8, 2009 4:02:30 PM

Owned 4 6.0 03 & 04s 1 is still in the family and i know the others as well. They are all over 350 miles, engines never open, i injector and a wiring issue. The rest was wear and tear, we service our vehicles for work and dont use chips and cheap filters. We have made sure our updates were done when they sent the notices
You can pound ford all you want but they build a great truck and i know any time we were down it was maintanance like batteries, tires or us just working the poop out of them.

Aluminum heads, I to thought not such a good idea when they did it on the Duramax. Seems to be working out alright for GM. The reason they use aluminum, save weight? My question was, or my point was this. A guy towing 20-30 round bales on a gooseneck trailer is not gonna be concerned with saving 150-200 pounds off his aluminum cylinder heads.

But, overhaul it looks like Ford has thought this one through and mentioned several times how they have learned from their mistakes. I'm hoping that they finally have something that can fill the shoes of the 7.3.

Posted by: Shawn | Sep 13, 2009 10:29:48 AM

Weeber,
Not everyone wants an I6. I hate the sound of the cummins I6. It makes the same sound at all RPM and load level. boooooorrrriiiiiinnng. More cylinders=less time between ignition= less fuel wasted just to spin the crank to the next firing.

Besides, if you get a Cummins, you wind up with a Dodge.

Posted by: Jake | Sep 13, 2009 5:01:12 PM

Im wondering how the turbo will perform, they used the same supplier for the 7.3. Look how many of those turbos failed! Honeywell always has problems with a new production launch. Just ask Mack!

Posted by: JUDD | Sep 15, 2009 8:51:06 AM

Complex control systems using valves requires an automatic control based input of an actuator. The actuator strokes the valve allowing the valve to be positioned accurately and allowing control over a variety of requirements.

They should of hung onto there percentage of Cummins and took it from Dodge in recent economic downturn. My freind bought a Dodge the same time I did in 05 and spent way more money keeping the truck on the road than I ever did keeping my 6.0 up and running so if you put the Cummins in the Ford you would have something. PS. My 6.0 has had the head gaskets done and 1 set of injectors and at 340,000 miles just tested perfect on an oil sample and the truck has never cost me any money, His truck is parked, same miles. THX.

Posted by: Whzbng | Sep 16, 2009 11:25:30 AM

Folks that always brag about the I6's always being better and that is what comes in Class 8 trucks seem to forget one of the most historic and popular big power engines was a V8. Caterpillar 3408 to be specific. Back to this engine, finally they do one in house and utilizing the best current technology from around the world. Give it a chance, it may well be a very good one. The EPA crap has gone way too far. That is the part I dislike. Aftercoolers... aka liquid cooled intercooler. They used to be common on Class 8 trucks but now they all use air to air. Not a fan of the urea business. Where do you get the stuff? Dealer? That seems like a negative because there will be some PO'd customers when the light comes on and the idiot salesmen never explained it to them. SAE bellhousing pattern is cool. So the manual is gone but with a SAE bellhousing pattern someone will come up with a kit to allow you to install any medium duty truck manual transmission, 7 speed spicer/ttc, 13 speed Roadranger, all sorts of interesting combos you could do if you can afford to dismantle what will probably be a 60k truck. I won't be affording one anytime soon so my 00' PSD will keep soldiering on.

Posted by: KB | Sep 17, 2009 9:34:06 AM

I'll stick with the 6.4L since I've remove the dpf and doc delete and add a sct chip with a 585 rwhp I'm getting 23mpg and dyno at 623hp and 1146 torque

6.4L This time we get it right! No wait, super poor fuel economy, turbo issues, performance doesn't match published power numbers.

6.7L This time we really, really really do have it right! We swear! Ignore those last two diesels. And hopefully you remember to keep the Urea tank full so you aren't stuck when it goes dry and the engine can't be restarted.

Someone said put a Cummins into a Ford? Why put a Cummins into a truck with an inadequate frame and brakes? Enough Kool-Aid from the Ford guys, look at the engineering numbers. SAE and fleet history shows the Dodge with a Cummins gets 14% better fuel economy and 3 times the brake life of the Ford offereing.

Except for International, all Diesel vehicles are using Urea to accomplish the lowering of emissions. As it is, big rigs with catalytic converters with Diesel particulate filters are 60 times cleaner then 1988 big rigs. I've seen trucks with 90,000 miles on them that you can see the chrome on the inside of the exhaust stack.
Urea is a fact of life for Diesel engines. Cummins only uses the non Urea on the light weight vehicles. On over 19,500gvw vehicles, Cummins uses Urea. Urea is a proven technology that already has been in use for 5 years in Europe. There are Freightliner trucks using the new Detroit DD15 getting an average of 7.6mpg. With Urea, we should see 80,000lb trucks, properly driven, getting into the 8mpg range-unbelievable. Good Luck, TomC

Posted by: TomC | Sep 26, 2009 11:06:08 AM

The manual transmission should not be left out. Paired with this new motor it would be awesome. I don't care how many gears the automatic has ( 5 is too many ) or how good autos are, I'd rather have 100% FULL control over my transmission. Screw the semi-auto stuff. If you can't drive a standard, you shouldn't drive. Unless medical issue says different.

Posted by: Doug | Sep 27, 2009 5:32:56 PM

the cat engines have been using liquid after coolers on thier big engines for several years and will be using the liquid cooler untill they exit the market in 2010 , mack also had a big v8 which was a really good engine if you needed a truck with that much power , hard to keep drive lines together with those big engines , the cat 3408 was a good engine also but was just to heavy another really good engine back in its prime was the detroit silver 92's just got done working on one today and if they were timed accuratly they will sound like a jet engine ready for take off if they are kept up they were really good engines way back when in the early eighties they were pushing 500 hp with'um and cat was doing it to with the 3408 and cummins had a wonderfull v8 engine that worked way better than that of a truck engine it was the tripple nickle as they were known , they roared into the marked and roared out even faster cummins do not make a v8 for good reason . because they never figured them out so they stuck with the inlines which hey even in the truck engines today the both (cat and cummins ) have some really stupid ideas that just do not work , like the wiring on the cats that they just solder pressure sensors on a common like and just throw a piece of shrink wrap on them and call it good and it takes less that one year in minnesota to be re doing all the joints because they are throwing codes and stuff aint working like boost sensors are not working so your not getting fuel and stuff like that and alot of times they dont throw codes with those wiring problems , and cummins they had some really dumb wiring connectors and how they hid the stuff beind the ecu , try getting one of those off when the trucks have been run in the salt like a state plow truck does , it just dont happen , then we have the ford 6.0 and we cant keep them out of the shop , I know a ton of others that have them and they are doing great but one has been towed into ford from the side of the road 135 times and the other 85 times and still counting and the latest is the engine is sitting in pieces at the ford dealor waiting for ford to come out from michigan to look at it , that right there tells me someting is definatley wrong here but we do have one that is doing really good so I dont know if there was someting that there should be a recall for trucks built at this certiain time that those truck were built , we have about 10 in total and all under 100k they are all 2005 models and only 2 have not been sitting at dealor more than on the road I know they have installed 8 sets of injectors on the one truck and the fuel is the best on the market we run it in 1500 different pieces of equipment and no problems at all even when it is 20 below they sit out side and they all start with the turn of a key , we keep them plugged in but there are alot of them out on the job that there is no plug ins and they all start and the heavy highway equipment is running this same fuel and no issues .... take it for what it is folks there are some really good one out there and there and some really puke ones out there and they are just destined to be good right away or puke right off the batt

Posted by: cooter | Oct 1, 2009 4:29:01 PM

The only problem with the 6.7 diesel is MADE IN MEXICO it should be made in the usa by american workers.

Posted by: Ken | Oct 4, 2009 8:43:00 PM

It should be pointed out that the exhaust manifold between the cylinder heads type design configuration is NOT a new concept at all, except for a small Diesel engine such as this one that Ford has designed. Most all large V configuration Diesel engines have always used this configuration. Probably one of the "smaller" engines of this configuration is the Cummins 28 liter V12 that has been around for many years. E.g., Caterpillar, Cummins, EMD, General Electric, MTU and others have always used this configuration on larger engines. If memory serves me right the configuration was even used on an old Packard V12 gasoline engine design used in the 1930s, although I believe the intake was also between the heads on that one.

I think this is a design concept for small turbocharged V form engines that is long overdue! Kudos to Ford for going to this design.